Re: [PATCH 2/2] receive-pack: support push-to-checkout hook

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Junio,

On Tue, 2 Dec 2014, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
> 
> >> Not really.  You need to remember that we write tests not to show
> >> off the new shiny, but to protect essential invariants from being
> >> broken by careless others attempting to rewrite the implementation
> >> in the future.
> >
> > Fair enough. You are the boss.
> >
> > I am not, therefore it does not matter what I think,
> 
> It is not that it does not matter because you are not the boss; it
> is just that when you are wrong, you are wrong.

Please, there is no need to get emotional, let alone personal.

I am not really interested in challenging your policy regarding the test
suite, even if it does hurt my development style where I want to run the
test suite frequently but its tests just take too long because their focus
is more on thoroughness rather than trying to save time in the manner I
suggested (i.e. by only lightly testing obscure code paths that will be
executed rarely, risking bugs in favor of adding tests when fixing said
bugs when – and if – they arise). There is nothing inherently wrong in the
way you want to have the test suite, it is a matter of preference, that is
all. I would like a more light-weight test suite that runs much faster,
you want a thorough one, even if it takes more time to run.

So: you are the boss, you do the things you do, and my opinion does not
matter. I say this most pragmatically, to save more time by ending this
discussion now. There are no hard feelings on my side.

Ciao,
Johannes

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]